logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.02.04 2014노2322
무고
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not have attended the meeting of the board of directors of the clan on July 25, 2008 and the temporary entertainment on May 22, 2010, and Defendant B did not have signed the meeting on May 22, 2010 while attending the meeting of the extraordinary general meeting on May 22, 2010.

Nevertheless, F and E arbitrarily signed and sealed the minutes as if H and Defendant B were present at the board of directors meetings and extraordinary general meetings, and forged and used them by submitting them to the Changwon District Court’s branch branch. As such, the submission of an accusation as stated in the instant facts charged by the Defendants to an investigation agency does not constitute a false accusation.

In addition, Defendant A submitted a petition and a written complaint to F, which was the former president of the said clan, for a large number of damage to the clan property, and delegated the same to L. In the process, it is nothing more than a false statement in the complaint.

Therefore, there was no doubt about the Defendants.

2. Determination

A. In relation to the crime of false accusation, the criminal intent is not necessarily required to be a conclusive intentional act, and is also sufficient for dolusent intent.

As such, the crime of false accusation is established by reporting the fact that the reporting person is not true and that the reported fact is false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642, May 25, 2006). In addition, the crime of false accusation is not committed on the ground that the purpose of filing a complaint is not to punish the other party, and that the purpose of filing a complaint is not to raise the cost, and it does not constitute a crime of false accusation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Do3271 delivered on December 12, 1995). B.

Judgment

In addition to the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., H attended the meeting of the board of directors at the investigative agency on July 25, 2008, and directly signed the minutes (Evidence No. 104 pages), and ii.

arrow